Uniforms and Crisis Response Programs 

Historically, differentiation amongst public safety and health professionals has often been marked by uniform color. As new programs emerged, uniform styles and colors were selected to reflect group identity and to visually distinguish one organization from another. Modern policing began in the 1820s with the formation of the London Metropolitan Police, whose navy, paramilitary-style uniforms were deliberately chosen to contrast with the red coats of the British military (Hall, 2016).This style was first replicated in 1850s Boston and Chicago, often with surplus Union Army uniforms, and soon spread across the country (Hall, 2016; Watson et al., 2019). The 1960s to 90s saw unsuccessful attempts to improve police-civilian relations through more ‘approachable’ uniform styles like Menlo Park’s green blazer and slacks, or the New York Police Department’s wearing of baseball caps, which ultimately undermined public perception and delegitimized forces, leading to an increase in assaults on police officers (Marshall, 2014). In contrast, 2001 ushered in a new era of militarized policing, with officers in tactical vests, body armor, and all black uniforms (Marshall, 2014). Since 2020, a shift towards demilitarization and plainclothes officers is apparent, especially on college campuses and in schools (Bryant, 2024; Moody, 2022). Overall, research indicates that darker police uniform colors are viewed more positively, possibly due to a connection to traditionally authoritative figures like clergy and judges (Nickels, 2008).  

Similar patterns are reflected in EMT uniforms, which emerged out of a necessity for differentiation from police as these programs expanded in the 1970s. The brightly colored uniforms and reflective strips improved visibility and helped establish a distinct identity. EMTs additionally adopted navy unform elements worn by both police and firefighters, to display connection to other authority figures (The Evolution of EMT Uniforms, 2025).  

As crisis response programs and other associated unarmed policing alternatives have rapidly expanded across the United States since 2020, so has the need for a standardized, recognizable uniform. Sociologically, a uniform serves as a “group emblem” (Joseph & Alex, 1972, p. 720). It “certifies legitimacy,” subscribing wearers to a set of values and behaviors expected of their role (Joseph & Alex, 1972, p. 719-20). For crisis response programs, this definition is especially important.  

Dr. Giacomantonio’s paper addresses relevant challenges associated with increased “institutionalization” of crisis response programs (2023, p. 434). He argues the importance of non-duplication among the multiple groups involved in these new models, including police, medical professionals, and social workers. Giacomantonio emphasizes that the extent to which crisis response programs establish a clear organizational mission is key to the legitimacy, identity, and ultimate success of these models (2023). Berlin and Carlström’s research in Swedish psychiatric hospitals echoes this sentiment. In their study, psychiatric workers were observed enacting cultural camouflage, the intentional concealing of professional symbols with negative connotations, including uniforms, name badges, and keys, which were associated with an outdated, regressive style of psychiatry. The authors suggest that this deliberate concealment of symbols only served to delegitimize the psychiatric services, and hindered advancement. They indicated that the intentional display of artefacts, in fact, could garner trusts and aid “cross-professional knowledge diffusion” (Berlin & Carlström, 2013). In this way, crisis response programs benefit from newness and vagueness in their identities and thus are granted the opportunity to intentionally display artefacts that establish their identity apart from other public safety services. Therefore, uniforms are evident as an important tool to legitimize and differentiate crisis response programs, even helping build trust and collaboration between crisis response programs and necessary collaborators including police, mental health professionals, first responders, and healthcare workers.  

Current Crisis Response Programs are varied in their approaches to uniforms. LA County’s Alternative Crisis Response Teams wear non-standardized plainclothes but are identified with large badges (Alternative Crisis Response, 2025). San Diego’s Mobile Crisis Response Teams are uniformed in purple, the color of Overdose Awareness (Telecare, 2019). Still others, like Minneapolis’ Behavioral Crisis Response Team have opted for more traditional, navy blue jackets similar to the casual wear of police, firefighters, and paramedics (Minneapolis, 2025). A study of service users in Portland revealed a preference for “colored shirts,” along with uniforms distinguishable from other organizations (Townley et al., 2019). Crisis Response Programs encounter issues when their uniforms lack differentiation from other services. The uniform of Indianapolis’ Mobile Crisis Assistance Team (MCAT) was described by an officer as a “half-way police uniform” (Watson et al., 2023, p. 19). Overall, it’s evident that Crisis Response Programs need a standardized uniform to improve the legitimacy and distinct professional identity of these programs.